Skip to main content

Full text of "ERIC ED456255: Are TAFE Organisations Learning Organisations? Do They "Walk the Talk"?"

See other formats


DOCUMENT RESUME 



ED 456 255 



CE 082 235 



AUTHOR 

TITLE 

PUB DATE 
NOTE 



AVAILABLE FROM 



PUB TYPE 
EDRS PRICE 
DESCRIPTORS 



IDENTIFIERS 



Comley, Les ; Arandez, Leoni; Holden, Sue; Kuriata, Ewa 

Are TAFE Organisations Learning Organisations? Do They "Walk 

the Talk"? 

2001-03-00 

1 5p . ; In: Research to Reality: Putting VET Research To Work. 
Proceedings of the Australian Vocational Education and 
Training Research Association (AVETRA) Conference (4th, 
Adelaide, Australia, March 28-30, 2001); see CE 082 232. 

For full text: 

http:/ /www . ave t ra . org . au/ PAPERS %202001/ COMLE Y% 2 0 ARANDE Z % 2 OHO 
LD EN% 2 0 KURIATA . pdf . 

Reports - Research (143) -- Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) 

MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. 

Academic Education; Adjustment (to Environment) ; Adult 
Learning; Comparative Analysis; Definitions; Educational 
Attitudes; Educational Change; Educational Environment; 
Educational Needs; Foreign Countries; *Lifelong Learning; 
Literature Reviews; Needs Assessment; *Organizational 
Climate; *Organizat ional Development; Position Papers; 
Postsecondary Education; Professional Development; Rural 
Areas; *Staff Development; Teacher Improvement; Technical 
Institutes; Trend Analysis; Universities; Urban Areas; 
♦Vocational Education; Vocational Education Teachers 
♦Learning Organizations; *TAFE (Australia) 



ABSTRACT 



A study examined whether Australia's technical and further 
education (TAFE) institutes are currently learning organizations or on the 
road to becoming learning organizations. Data were collected through a 
literature review and a questionnaire administered to staff at two 
dual-sector universities, two metropolitan TAFE institutes, and two 
rural/regional TAFE institutes. Of the 79 respondents, 24.1% were general 
staff, 65.8% were teaching/teaching support staff, and 10.1% were senior 
managers. The majority of respondents in all three categories agreed with the 
following statements: (1) TAFE staff are lifelong learners; (2) TAFE 

organizations are learning organizations; (3) TAFE divisions of dual-sector 
universities demonstrate the characteristics of a learning organization more 
strongly than single-sector TAFE institutes do; and (4) rural/regional TAFE 
institutes demonstrate the characteristics of a learning organization more 
strongly than metropolitan TAFE institutes do. The percentages of respondents 
who believe that their TAFE institute exhibits various characteristics of 
learning organizations were as follows: provide learning opportunities for 
staff, 91.0%; have a shared organization vision, 84.8%; are open to change, 
79.2%; manifest interunit cooperation, 65.4%; offer team learning 
opportunities, 71.5%; and develop human capital, 72.4%. It was concluded 
that, although the respondents considered their organizations to be learning 
organizations, additional evidence is needed to definitively support that 
contention. (Contains 10 references.) (MN) 



Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made 
from the original document. 



(N 

VO 

vn 



Q 



w 



Are TAFE organisations learning organisations? Do they 
'walk the talk'? 



Les Comley, Leoni Arandez, Sue Holden and Ewa Kuriata 

Victoria University 



PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND 
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS 
BEEN GRANTED BY 



TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 

1 



The Centre for Curriculum Innovation and Development is located within 
the Technical and Further Education (TAFE) Division of Victoria 
University. It is involved in the development of Training Packages, 
learning resources and professional development for TAFE staff both 
internally and externally. As an outcome of its local and national 
activities, the Centre has identified the need and observed some 
movement towards change within the TAFE workforce and institutes. 

TAFE institutes and teachers are key components of the strategy to grow 
individuals, organisations, communities and states into learning sites 
embodying the principles of lifelong learning. However, there is a 
perception that these institutes and their staff are experiencing self-doubt 
and confusion about their role in the evolving learning environment. This 
paper seeks to position TAFE institutes on the basis of responses from 
TAFE staff within six such organisations with regard to their own 
development as learning organisations. 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 
Office of Educational Research and Improvement 
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION 

/ f CENTER (ERIC) 

This document has been reproduced as 
received from the person or organization 
originating it 

□ Minor changes have been made to 
improve reproduction quality. 



• Points of view or opinions stated in this 
document do not necessarily represent 
official OERI position or policy. 



c\) 



Uo 

'O 




Introduction 

As a ‘cradle to grave’ process, Lifelong Learning empowers individuals 
to acquire and confidently apply, all the knowledge, values, skills and 
understanding that they require throughout their lifetime. 

In a similar way, Lifelong Learning can assist communities to build civic 
participation, caring citizenship and economic resilience, while for 
organisations Lifelong Learning can foster greater innovation, 
competitiveness and productivity. 

“Lifelong Learning for all” is also required by the Government as a key 
strategy for ensuring the State’s successful participation in the global 
knowledge economy. 

... to create a cohesive, dynamic and inclusive ‘State of Learning’ [or the 
learning state]. (Ralph 2000) 

Global competition and technology have dramatically changed the workplace. In an 
effort to create and sustain competitive advantage it is imperative for organisations 
to focus on learning as a lifelong challenge. TAFE organisations are constantly being 
challenged by the dynamic environment in which they exist and an essential 
characteristic required for survival is the capacity to model characteristics of lifelong 
learning and learning organisations, which will ultimately underpin the 
development of the learning state. TAFE organisation representatives, most notably 
the teaching staff, must demonstrate these characteristics. 



2 

BEST COPY AVAILABLE 



This paper adopts the perspective that to create a learning state, various 
requirements must be implemented through educational organisations and their 
teaching staff. The paper focuses upon one segment of the education industry - TAFE 
organisations - and questions whether they are up to the task. Are these 
organisations staffed by lifelong learners who participate in organisations that are, or 
are becoming, model learning organisations - do they in fact walk the talk? 

Literature review 

Organisations are undergoing fundamental shifts in the ways they conduct business 
(McGill and Slocum 1995). Today's organisations are knowledge-based. They are 
designed to process ideas, experiences and information. In many industries, the 
ability to learn and change faster than the competition is the key to survival. The 
pace of change will continue to accelerate. The learning organisation is a 
revolutionary way to think about strategy, structure and service. To bring about such 
a dramatic change in behaviour, every available organisational resource must be 
focused upon learning. 

A learning organisation has a culture and value set that promotes learning. A learning 
culture is one in which there is clear and consistent openness to experience, 
encouragement of responsible risk taking in pursuit of continuous improvement and 
willingness to acknowledge failures and learn from them. A learning culture is not 
captured in a slogan-based mission statement crafted by a consulting firm. 

A broad definition of learning facilitates knowledge transfer by encouraging 
discussion of the development aspects of every possible kind of experience. 'What 
did you learn?' is a question that encourages sharing, even from failed job 
assignments, seminars and customer visits. Casting a wide net as to what is learning 
has the further advantage of broadening the issue of who is developed. 

In a learning organisation, everyone is involved in learning. 

Kirnane (1999) proposed that the challenge for organisations is to ensure that they do 
not suffer from too much data and too little knowledge. The barriers of the industrial 
era hierarchies need to be replaced by processes that enable systematic knowledge 
sharing. Organisations need to evolve into units in which there is a free flow of ideas 
and more use is made of their external information sources. 

Fisher and White (2000) have defined organisational learning as being; 

... a reflective process, played out by members at all levels of the 
organisation, that involves the collection of information from both the 
external and internal environments. This information is filtered through a 
collective sense-making process, which results in shared interpretations 
that can be used to instigate actions resulting in enduring changes to the 
organisation’s behaviour and theories-in-use. 

Organisations are social entities (Fisher and White 2000) in which individuals 
interrelate and create a 'collective consciousness', and organisational learning is: 

... emergent from interpersonal and/or behavioural connections and 
modelled in terms of the organisational connections that constitute a 




3 



learning network rather than as information transfer from one individual 
to another. (Glynn et al 1994, p 56) 

In his 1999 publication, Kearns has argued that VET needs to broaden its scope in 
'response to the anticipated changes of the 21 st century' (1999, p vii). Lifelong 
learning needs to be the ruling paradigm. Such an approach is agreed internationally 
with the focus of a knowledge-based society being dependent upon its human 
capital, which in other contexts may be referred to as intellectual capital (Ferrier and 
Whitingham 2000). 

Advocating the application of a broad definition, Kearns (1999) argues that lifelong 
learning is an evolving concept, viewed as both an educational and social practice. 
The UK Green Paper (1998, in Kearns 1999) argues that: 

We have no choice but to prepare for this new age [Lifelong Learning] in 
which the key to success will be the continuous education and 
development of the human mind and imagination. 

Such an outcome would require society to be characterised by . . different qualities 
from those required in the past industrial and service economies' (Kearns 1999, p 1). 
Such a society would be a 'developed learning society in which everyone should be 
able, motivated, and actively encouraged to learn throughout life' (Kearns 1999, p 1). 
VET is required to develop a humanist approach in which people, particularly its 
people, and their individual development, are the key focus for the way ahead. 

Kearns (1999, p 8) concludes that VET as a system '... still exhibits signs and 
symptoms of a system in transition,..' . Moreover: 

[T]he orientation of reform has been towards implementing a training 
paradigm whose roots, though modified, lie in an industrial society - 
while the learning aspects of reform have been relatively neglected (1999, 

P 8). 

VET can contribute to the development of organisations by becoming a point of 
convergence for the '... three pillars of a learning society' (Kearns 1999, p 14), formal 
education and training, the enterprise sector and the community sector. "The more 
linkages and connections that can be forged between these sectors, the richer will be 
the outcomes for stakeholders' (Kearns 1999, p 14). To undertake this role, VET needs 
to be aware of the role of the workplace in forging and leading change. Furthermore 
it is in the workplace that a need for continuous learning, employability, 
competitiveness and the enhancement of human capital are most evident. VET needs 
to respond by addressing the needs of the workplace, including those of the largest 
employer group: small business. 

To achieve these goals, however, the workplace needs to encourage, support and 
reward learning. An environment supportive of people and teams, a strategic sense 
and vision and broad definition of roles foster a learning culture. Kearns (1999) 
determines that a learning organisation embodies these features. 

So the challenge for Australia, individual communities, their constituent 
organisations and individuals laid out by these writers is that no one part can 
succeed without demonstrating the characteristics of the next lowest level, similar to 




Maslow's hierarchy of needs. The 'hierarchy' referred to here is illustrated by the 
following diagram - the Hierarchy of the learning state: 

Figure 1: Hierarchy of the learning state 




This hierarchy emphasises the notion of interconnectedness, or - as some writers 
may describe the relationship - convergence. It assumes that without lifelong 
learners, you cannot have a learning organisation. Without learning organisations 
you cannot have learning communities which must exist for there to be a learning 
state. 

The policy impetus of the education industry, which includes TAFE organisations, is 
expected to provide the necessary drive to support the evolution of the Learning 
Society. 'The new TAFE is thus constructed as an organisation with norms, values 
and modes of conduct that are largely indistinguishable from those of private 
organisations' (Chappell 1999, p 10). Given this requirement and the rationale 
underpinning the Hierarchy of the Learning Society, TAFE organisations need to be 
learning organisations, and as learning organisations, they need to be predominantly 
populated by lifelong learners. 

The question this research activity sought to answer is: 

Are TAFE organisations learning organisations? 



In answering this question, the following hypotheses were developed: 

• TAFE staff are lifelong learners 

• TAFE organisations are learning organisations 

• TAFE divisions of dual sector universities more strongly demonstrate the 
characteristics of a learning organisation than do single-sector TAFE institutes 

• Rural/ regional TAFE institutes more strongly demonstrate the characteristics 
of a learning organisation than Metropolitan TAFE institutes. 



Methodology 

The following data collection methods were used to answer the research questions: 



Literature review - As part of our methodology, a literature review was undertaken 
aimed at soliciting various views, frameworks and experience in relation to learning 
organisations and lifelong learning. From the literature, a theoretical framework was 
established around which the questionnaire was developed. 

Questionnaire - A questionnaire was the primary data collection tool used to 
identify quantitative data and a limited amount of qualitative information from 
respondents. The use of ranked evaluative statements and tick-box responses 
enabled respondents to complete the questionnaire easily and to ensure a consistent 
response format. 

The characteristics of a learning organisation and lifelong learners identified by 
Kearns (1999) were used as the basis of the questionnaire's construction. These 
characteristics are shown below. 

Kearns' profile (1999, p 29) of the learning organisation includes the: 

• provision of learning opportunities for staff 

• building of a shared vision 

• demonstration of openness to change and adaptability 

• adopting of a systems perspective 

• valuing and support of team learning 

• commitment to the development of human capital. 

Kearns (1999, p 13) profiled the lifelong learner as having: 

• an inquiring mind and curiosity 

• 'helicopter 7 vision 

• a repertoire of learning skills 

• a commitment to personal mastery and ongoing development 

• interpersonal skills 

• information literacy. 




6 



Sample 

The questionnaires were sent to dual-sector universities (2), metropolitan (2) and 
rural/ regional (2) TAFE institutes. The participating organisations were: 

Dual-sector universities: 

• Northern Territory University (Darwin, Northern Territory) 

• Swinburne University of Technology (Melbourne, Victoria) 

Metropolitan TAFE institutes: 

• Central Metropolitan College of TAFE (Perth, Western Australia) 

• Kangan Batman Institute of TAFE (Melbourne, Victoria) 

Rural/ regional TAFE institutes: 

• Mt Isa Institute of TAFE (Mt Isa, Queensland) 

• Sunraysia Institute of TAFE (Mildura, Victoria) 

The dual-sector universities provided data from their respective TAFE sectors. 

The following sample sought responses from each of the participating organisations: 

• the most senior TAFE manager (or another manager from the senior group)* 

• five general staff (non-teaching) 

• 15 teaching staff (covering a cross section of the organisation's programs). 

*Note: this group was treated as non-teaching as its members rarely deliver 
teaching/ programs to students 

The ratio of teaching to non-teaching staff sought for the sample may not be 
representative of the employment patterns within TAFE organisations. For example, 
in Victorian TAFE institutes . the general pattern is that most Institutes have 
approximately 40% of their EFT workforce as non-teachers and 60% as teachers' 
(PETE 2000, p 48). However, a premise of this paper contends that TAFE teachers 
will most directly influence students to embrace or ignore the principles of lifelong 
learning that underpin the development of learning organisations. Therefore, the 
study sought to determine the responses of teaching staff more so than those of non- 
teaching staff. The sample sought to receive responses in the ratio of 71% teaching 
staff to 29% non-teaching. 

Questionnaire response 

Seventy-nine responses were received from the six participating organisations. The 
occupational category source of these responses is shown in Table 1. 



Table 1: Respondents by occupational category 



Respondent group 


Number 


Percentage 


General staff 


19 


24.1% 


Teacher/ teaching support 


52 


65.8% 


Senior manager 


8 


10.1% 


Total 


79 


100.0% 



Summary of findings 

The results to the research questions are shown in Table 2 below. 



Table 2: Research question results 



Question 


Result * 


Are TAFE staff lifelong learners? 


Yes 


Are TAFE organisations learning organisations? 


Yes 


Do TAFE divisions of dual sector universities more strongly demonstrate 
the characteristics of a learning organisation than do single sector TAFE 
institutes? 


Yes 


Do rural/regional TAFE institutes more strongly demonstrate the 
characteristics of a learning organisation than do metropolitan TAFE 
institutes? 


Yes 



Results and comments 

Are TAFE organisations learning organisations? 



Table 3 presents a summary of responses to questions regarding TAFE institutes as learning 
organisations. 



Table 3: Learning organisation results 



Characteristic 


Total 


Dual 

sector 


Regional / 
rural 


Metropol' 

n 


Learning opportunities provided for 
staff 


91.0% 


100.0% 


86.7% 


90.0% 


Shared organisation vision 


84.8% 


88.9% 


87.1% 


80.0% 


Openness to change 


79.2% 


88.2% 


83.3% 


70.0% 


Inter-unit cooperation 


65.4% 


52.9% 


83.3% 


53.3% 


Team learning opportunities 


71.5% 


76.5% 


80.0% 


60.0% 



Development of human capital 


72.4% 


61.1% 


80.0% 


71.4% 



Sixty-eight (86.1%) of staff in TAFE organisations believe that their organisations are 
learning organisations. Dual-sector universities (94.4%) rank ahead of rural/ regional 
TAFE institutes (89.2%), that in turn rank ahead of Metropolitan TAFE institutes 
(80%) as learning organisations. Of the occupational groups, senior managers (50%) 
were the least supportive of the contention that their organisations were not learning 
organisations. Conversely, 94.7% of general/ administrative staff believed that they 
worked for a learning organisation, followed by teachers/ teaching support staff, of 
which 88.5% believed that their organisations were learning organisations. 

Kearns (1999) identified six characteristics (italicised in the discussion below) within 
the profile of a learning organisation. The questionnaire results for these 
characteristics confirm that TAFE organisations are learning organisations, although 
there is some reservation in making this statement. 

Ninety-one percent of TAFE organisations provide their staff with learning opportunities. 
All respondents in dual-sector universities have the opportunity to participate in 
learning activities, 90% of TAFE staff in metropolitan TAFE institutes have a similar 
opportunity whilst 86.7% of staff in rural/ regional TAFE institutes also have access 
to these opportunities. 

Building a shared vision proved problematic for all TAFE organisations, but the result 
is still particularly high (84.8%). Dual-sector universities again ranked ahead of the 
other organisations (88.9%), however rural/ regional TAFE institutes (87.1%) ranked 
ahead of larger metropolitan TAFE organisations (80%) in this matter. 

As issues that impact upon organisational performance are taken into consideration, 
TAFE organisations appear to have some difficulty in meeting the criteria supporting 
their classification as learning organisations. 

Openness to change and adaptability is demonstrated but is clearly questioned by many 
staff. 79.2% of the respondents believed that their organisations were open to change 
and were adaptable. Again, the dual-sector universities (88.2%) ranked ahead of 
rural/ regional TAFE institutes (83.3%). Quite clearly, however, metropolitan TAFE 
institutes have some difficulty in demonstrating this characteristic, with only 70% of 
respondents classifying their organisations as open to change and adaptable. 

Kearns (1999) identified adopting a systems perspective as a characteristic of the 
learning organisation. This characteristic caters for interconnectedness, applied 
system perspectives, ecological perspectives and the fostering of helicopter vision 
among staff. We have interpreted this to mean adopting a whole-of-organisation 
approach and asked the question, 'generally, do units within the organisation operate 
cooperatively ?' Whilst our classification of Kearns (1999) may be challenged, the 
response to the question asked is disconcerting. Rural/ regional TAFE institutes 
(83.3%) are more cooperative between themselves. However only 53.3% of staff in 
metropolitan TAFE institutes and 52.9% of TAFE staff in dual-sector universities 
believe that their organisations demonstrate inter-unit cooperation. Quite clearly, this 
aspect of operational activity (65.4% overall), or lack thereof, in TAFE organisations 




9 



challenges the initial hypothesis that TAFE organisations are learning organisations. 
It may well be contended that individual units within the overall organisation are 
learning organisations, but the organisation when taken as a whole is not! 

Similar results and concerns are identified when the value and support of team learning 
is considered. Team learning is better encouraged in rural/ regional TAFE institutes 
(80%), and is evident in dual-sector universities (76.5%). However, an apparent lack 
of comparable support for this in metropolitan TAFE institutes (60%) reduces the 
overall result to 71.5%. 

Finally the commitment to the development of human capital provides for some 
interesting results. The overall result for this characteristic was 72.4%. This result is 
buoyed by the strong performance of rural/ regional TAFE institutes (80%), who are 
perceived as more strongly committed to the development of their staff, ranking well 
ahead of metropolitan TAFE institutes (71.4%) and dual-sector universities (61.1%). 
When taken with the result of the provision of learning opportunities (characteristic 
1), the outcome for the dual-sector universities appears inconsistent. However, the 
provision of learning opportunities and a commitment to the development of staff 
are two very different things. 

Firstly an organisation may provide opportunities for staff to learn, but if those 
opportunities are not relevant, or are contrary to the staff's learning needs, then this 
may be perceived as a lack of commitment. For example, learning opportunities may 
be made available in a range of activities such as application software skills, human 
resource management issues and general learning. But this is quite different to issues 
pertaining to Training Packages, VET in Schools, workplace delivery and assessment. 
Yes, learning is available, but it does not match with staff learning needs - resulting 
in a perceived lack of commitment. Certainly such a conclusion may be justified 
when taken into account with the support of team learning. In this characteristic, 
dual-sector universities demonstrate a much weaker result when compared to 
rural/ regional TAFE institutes. It may well be that in team learning situations, TAFE 
staff in dual sector universities are provided with exposure to the types of learning 
they need - and the provision of learning in a team or unit context is not aligned to 
the organisation demonstrating a commitment to the development of its staff. 

When compared to single-sector TAFE institutes, dual-sector universities are rated 
higher by their TAFE staff as being learning organisations (94.4%) than single sector 
TAFE institutes (80.4%). 

The ranking of dual-sector universities as learning organisations (Q. 8) ahead of 
single-sector TAFE institutes per se is challenged when an analysis is undertaken 
between the three organisational categories used in this paper. An analysis by 
demonstrated characteristic produces an interesting outcome. By averaging the 
ranking of each type of organisation, rural/ regional TAFE institutes (1.6 7) rank 
ahead of dual-sector universities (1.83), whereas metropolitan TAFE institutes (2.5) 
are least able to demonstrate the characteristics of a learning organisation. 

Rural/ regional TAFE institutes have staff who believe that their organisations 
strongly demonstrate a degree of unity (cooperation), team learning and a 
commitment to the development of their people. In addition, they ranked slightly 
behind dual sector universities in the sharing of the organisation's vision (87.1% as 



against 88.9%). However, a larger sample is required to provide a definitive result for 
these two types of organisations. 

On the other hand, despite the small sample, metropolitan TAFE institutes were 
quite clearly less able to demonstrate their capacity as learning organisations, 
achieving a rate of 80% or less for all but one (learning opportunities) of the 
characteristics. 

Are TAFE staff lifelong learners? 

All teaching/ teaching support staff believed that they were lifelong learners, a 
particularly positive result given the changing nature of their work and identity as 
identified by Chappell (1999), and their role in teaching others to become lifelong 
learners. Surprisingly, one (12.5%) senior manager did not classify him/herself as a 
lifelong learner, with three (16.7%) general/administrative staff giving the same 
response. Of the 74 lifelong learners, ten (13.5%) did not believe that their 
organisations were learning organisations. 

The characteristics of a lifelong learner as identified by Kearns (1999) were used as 
the basis for determining the status of the outcome. (Note: there was an additional 
inquiry to determine personal capacity to change, and interpersonal effectiveness 
was modified to learning from others and sharing of personal knowledge). The 
percentage of respondents who agreed that they demonstrated each characteristic is 
shown in Table 4. 



Table 4: Lifelong learner results 



Characteristic 


Total 


Dual 

sector 


Regional / 
rural 


Metropol' 

n 


Inquiring mind 


97.4% 


94.1% 


96.8% 


100.0% 


Concept of the big picture 


96.1% 


94.4% 


100.0% 


96.6% 


Commitment to personal development 


98.7% 


100.0% 


100.0% 


96.7% 


Capacity to change 


100% 


100.0% 


100.0% 


100.0% 


Learning from other team members 


97.5% 


88.9% 


100.0% 


100.0% 


Sharing your knowledge with other 
team members 


94.9% 


88.9% 


100.0% 


93.3% 


Ability to use modem information 
technologies 


94.9% 


88.9% 


96.7% 


96.7% 


Awareness of different types of 
learning 


97.5% 


100.0% 


96.8% 


96.7% 



Quite clearly all respondents believed that they demonstrated the characteristics of a 
lifelong learner. Of interest is the apparent lack of knowledge sharing that takes 
place within dual-sector universities (88.9%) and metropolitan TAFE institutes 
(93.3%), however there is little causal information that can expand upon this 
divergence between the organisational types at this stage of our analysis. 




11 



Concerns arise when one lifelong learning characteristic ('knowledge sharing') is 
linked to the learning organisation characteristic 'inter-unit cooperation'. Of the 74 
who believed that they shared their knowledge with others within their team, 23 
(31.1%) did not believe the organisation demonstrated the characteristic of inter-unit 
cooperation. Given that these people are prepared to share their knowledge with 
others, albeit within their team, it is most likely that they would also be prepared to 
share their knowledge with others from within the same organisation. This result 
may indicate that there are other variables that interfere with TAFE organisations' 
capacities to cooperate internally and effectively share knowledge. 

Conclusion 

Final conclusions regarding TAFE institutes as learning organisations and TAFE staff 
as lifelong learners are not appropriate at this stage. Evaluative statements 
supporting the closed questions within the questionnaire are still being analysed. 
There are quite clearly some inconsistencies in the results and a broader study of 
TAFE institutes as learning organisations - and their staff as lifelong learners - is 
clearly needed. 

TAFE staff have indicated that they believe their organisations are learning 
organisations and that they themselves are lifelong learners. Yet there is evidence to 
suggest that TAFE staff are not risk takers, and their reluctance is related to a fear of 
criticism from management. Additional evidence is required to definitively support 
this statement. However, were it to be true, then the assertion that TAFE institutes 
are learning organisations and TAFE staff are lifelong learners is certainly open to 
broader debate. 

Future research 

The results from this research have generated more questions than they may have 
answered. The following is a range of issues that have been identified within this 
survey as requiring further research. 

1. Why don't all TAFE senior managers classify their organisations as learning 
organisations? Whilst it can be inferred that the notion of the learning 
organisation is part of an evolving culture, and as such it may be accepted 
that not all organisations have evolved to the same degree, this question 
needs to be asked. Seven (87.5%) of TAFE senior managers believed that their 
organisation was a learning organisation. One senior manager believed that 
his/her organisation was not. Is the degree of evolution the only explanation, 
or are there other factors that these respondents have identified and their 
peers have chosen to ignore? 

2. Is organisation size a factor in creating a learning organisation? Do smaller 
organisations and those with fewer campuses create a greater sense of unity 
and 'community'? The rural/ regional TAFE organisations are much smaller 
than dual sector universities and metropolitan TAFE institutes that 
participated in this survey. However, these smaller organisations certainly 
performed much better than their metropolitan TAFE counterparts and, it 
may be argued, at least as well as the dual-sector universities. 




12 



3. In larger organisations, does the unit or team within the structure develop its 
own character to overcome the difficulties (Lei et al 1999) presented by a 
'whole of organisation' approach? 

Alternatively, is the prevailing organisation culture a factor that encourages 
or discourages the 'evolution' of learning organisations? Dual-sector 
universities are historically perceived as more open and rigorous in their 
discussion of management and 'academic' issues. Consequently, their culture 
encapsulates many of the characteristics pertaining to the learning 
organisation. 

4. Why do regional/ rural TAFE institutes demonstrate characteristics that 
support cooperative behaviour? Again, is size a factor in determining this 
matter? As an organisation grows in size, a bureaucracy forms and internal 
politics and alliances create divisions and in some cases a sense of ownership 
of the intellectual capital, thereby reducing the knowledge sharing capability 
of the organisation (Lei et al 1999). 

5. Is there a conflict between the learning needs of TAFE staff in dual-sector 
universities and the provision of learning opportunities? 

6. Why do dual-sector universities perform better as learning organisations 
when compared to metropolitan TAFE institutes? Is it a question of TAFE 
staff in dual-sector universities having access to a broader range of resources 
(ie universities offering many services to their TAFE staff at a lower cost or no 
cost while single-sector TAFE institutes buy these services in or pay for 
them)? Does access to a shared and/ or larger infrastructure provide TAFE 
staff in dual-sector universities with better access to some of the tools of the 
learning organisation (eg libraries, computer facilities) than are available to 
staff in single-sector TAFE institutes? 

7. Is personal self-image a contributing factor in creating the lifelong learner? Is 
location a factor in creating a stronger self-image? In large cities, do 
universities have a higher profile than do TAFE institutes? In rural/ regional 
environments, are TAFE institutes more valued community members than 
metropolitan TAFE institutes? 

8. Is learning in a smaller organisation more visible and does it promote a 
culture that supports knowledge sharing? 

9. Is professional development in a metropolitan environment perceived as 
individually focused rather than organisation-focused? 

10. What impact does job mobility play in promoting an organisational focus? 

11. Are TAFE staff risk takers? Are mistakes in TAFE considered learning 
experiences? Are TAFE staff reluctant to take risks because they are 
concerned about personal repercussions? 




13 



Acknowledgements 

The research team would like to acknowledge the cooperation and participation of 
the following organisations and their staff: 

• Central Metropolitan College of TAFE 

• Kangan-Batman Institute of TAFE 

• Mt Isa Institute of TAFE 

• Northern Territory University (TAFE Division) 

• Sunraysia Institute of TAFE 

• Swinburne University of Technology (TAFE Division) 



References 

Chappell C (1999) Issues of teacher identity in a restructuring VET system. Working 
Paper no 31, RCVET. 

Ferrier F and Whittingham K (2000) Emerging skill requirements of the Australian 
economy. Centre for Curriculum Innovation and Development Seminar Series, 
Victoria University (unpublished). 

Fisher S R and White M A (2000) Downsizing in a learning organisation: are there 
hidden costs? Academy of Management Review, vol 25, no 1. 
http://web6.infotrac.galegroup.co...xrn 1 0 A59481965?sw aep=vut main 
(accessed 7 April 2000). 

Glynn M A, Lant T K and Milliken F J (1994) Mapping learning processes in 
organizations. Cited in S R Fisher and M A White (2000) Downsizing in a learning 
organisation: are there hidden costs? Academy of Management Review, vol 25, no 1. 
http://web6.infotrac.galegroup.co...xrn 1 0 A59481965?sw aep=vut main 
(accessed 7 April 2000). 

Kearns P (1999) Lifelong learning - implications for VET: a discussion paper. UTS, 
NCVER. 

Kirnane D E (1999) Getting wise to knowledge management. Association 
Management, vol 21, no 8. 

http://web6.infotrac.galegroup.co. ..rn 10 0 A55777694?sw aep=vut main 
(accessed 7 April 2000). 

Kline P and Saunders B (1993) Ten steps to a learning organization. Great Ocean 
Publishers. 

Lei D, Slocum J and Pitts R (1999) Designing organisations for competitive 
advantage: the power of unlearning and learning. Organisational Dynamics, winter, 
pp 24-38. 

McGill M E and Slocum Jr J W (1995) Executive development in learning 
organizations. American Journal of Management Development, vol 1, no 2, pp 23-30. 




14 



Ralph D. South Australian Centre for Lifelong Learning and Development. 
http : / / www .premcab .sa. go v. au / lif elongdearning / (accessed 8 January 2001). 



Contact details 

Sue Holden 

Ph: +61 3 9284 8351 

Email: Sue.Holden@vu.edu.au 




15 



r of t j .^-2 



0 




U.S. Department of Education 

Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI) 
National Library of Education (NLE) 
Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) 




REPRODUCTION RELEASE 

(Specific Document) 



I. DOCUMENT IDENTIFICATION: 



Title: p 

! sq(l<UL(X in £ 


|< ^ 


[ 'h ^ / 


Anwvcu -1 


i i 


c c_ JlCC i 


f 


Author(s): 


Corporate Source: 


Publication Date: 



II. REPRODUCTION RELEASE: 



m jh£ ^ s , sem,n ? te f “ as P° ss,b ' e tlme| y and significant materials of interest to the educational community, documents announced in the 

TnH eiertnnir ^ ° H ° SV if Educatlon < RIE )' are usual| y made available to users in microfiche, reproduced paper copy 

ol M , m ' and f°H d thr0U ^ th f ,f RIC DoCument Reproduction Service (EDRS). Credit is given to the source of each document, and i 
reproduction release is granted, one of the following notices is affixed to the document. 



If permission is granted to reproduce and disseminate the identified document, 
of the page. 



please CHECK ONE of the following three options and sign at the bottom 



The sample sticker shown below will be 
affixed to ail Level 1 documents 



PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND 
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS 
BEEN GRANTED BY 




TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 



i 




Check here for Level 1 release, permitting reproduction 
and dissemination In microfiche or other ERIC archival 
media (e.g.. electronic) and paper copy. 



The sample sticker shown below will be 
affixed to all Level 2A documents 


The sample sticker shown below will be 
affixed to all Level 2B documents 


PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND 
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL IN 
MICROFICHE, AND IN ELECTRONIC MEDIA 
FOR ERIC COLLECTION SUBSCRIBERS ONLY 
HAS BEEN GRANTED BY 




PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND 
DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL IN 
MICROFICHE ONLY HAS BEEN GRANTED BY 


A®. 




A® 






c3> 


TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 




J 

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES 
INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 


2A 




2B 



Level 2A Level 2B 



I I 

□ □ 

Check here for Level 2A release, permitting reproduction Check here for Level 2B release, permitting 

an dissemination in microfiche and In electronic media reproduction and dissemination in microfiche only 

for ERIC archival collection subscribers only 



„ , Documents will be processed as Indicated provided reproduction quality permits. 

If permission to reproduce Is granted, but no box is checked, documents will be processed at Level 1. 



hereby grant to the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) nonexclusive permission to reproduce and disseminate this document 
as indicated above. Reproduction from the ERIC microfiche or electronic media by persons other than ERIC employees and its system 
contractors requires permission from the copyright holder. Exception is made for non-profit reproduction by libraries and other service agencies 
to satisfy information needs of educators in response to discrete inquiries y 

^ - 




Printed Nama/PosrtiorVTitle: ^^, 77 ,*^^ 

X r-’-f /ZC rMl U , Vfs? 


Organization/ Ad dress: Loclcsc* =^ Q 


Telephone: _ - 

feuaoy? sg-zofy? 


FAX C'X C 1 %C c \ MCX'f 


E-Mail AddreX: -v 


Da,e: t£!l\ol 



Sign 

here,-* 

5e 

ERIC